TMI Blog1992 (2) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the respondents as to the manner in which Boroline is to be classified. The petitioner's case is that in 1948 licence was granted to G.D. Company to manufacture and sell Boroline as a drug and medicine under the Drugs Act, 1940 (now known as Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940) and the Rules made thereunder being Drug Licence No. D.L. 36/M. The said Licence has from time to time been renewed under the said Act. As per the requirement of Rule 103(3) of the Rules framed under the Drugs Act, 1940 the true formula and details of ingredients of Boroline have been also printed and written in in-deliable ink or the outer label of every package containing Boroline being a proprietary medicine. 3. According to the petitioner Boroline is an Antise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was amended by the Finance Act, 1964. By such amendment the definition of Cosmetics was enlarged. Thereupon the respondent Union of India claimed and contended again that the petitioner No. 1 was liable to pay Central Excise Duty on Boroline as on Cosmetic under the said amended Tariff Item No. 14F. The respondent Union of India also issued Challans for payment of several lakhs of rupees at differential duty and Special Excise Duty alleged to be payable on Boroline as a Cosmetic. The petitioner refuted such claims and contentions. As a result, by its letter dated the 25th November, 1964 the respondent Union of India informed the petitioner that the Board of Revenue had decided that: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity and correctness of the aforesaid Tariff Advice dated 16th July, 1982. A Rule Nisi was issued by this Court. During the pendency of the aforesaid Rule the respondents by a Trade Notice No. 212/P or P Medicine - 3/CE/WB/82, dated 20- 10-1982 withdraw the earlier Trade Notice No. 173/Cosmetics Toilet Preparation 3/CE/82, dated 18-8-1982. In view of the subsequent Trade Notice hereto annexed and marked with the letter 'L' confirming that BOROLINE merits classification as Patent or Proprietary Medicine under Item No. 14E of the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, the petitioner was advised not to proceed by further with the said application and by an order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n". In my view, the explanation has not changed the law in any way. Whether Boroline was to be classified as a Cosmetic and Toilet Preparation or not has been gone into at great length between the parties at various stages. The petitioner's writ application has also been disposed of on the basis of the agreement upholding the petitioner's contention that the Boroline is a drug. This decision was given having regard to the essential ingredient of Boroline and its character. My attention was drawn to a judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of Abdul Moid and Others v. The State, 1977 Crl. L.J. 1325, where it was held that Boroline was a drug. That was a case decided under the Drug and Cosmetic Act, 1940. In that case it was observed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
